HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12161997 - D8 T
10
Contra
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS �� Costa
p +a'A;co�1 '
0
Count
FROM: Dennis M.Barry
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY .DEVELOPMENT �o•.
sra'covK'�
DATE: December 16, 1997
SUBJECT: Hearing on Rezoning application and companion development plan
application #RZ973051, DP973013 to rezone approximately 2 . 83 acres of
land from Planned Unit District (P-1) to Planned Unit District (P-1)
and to construct a 106 unit multiple family residential project on the
property bounded by Cherry Lane, Las Juntas Way and Santos Lane near
the Pleasant Hill BART Station area of the County. A variance from the
minimum area requirement (5 acres required) for a P-1 development is
also requested (2 . 83 acres requested) . Application filed by Essex
Property Trust, Inc. (Applicant) and Ottmann Properties, Ltd. (Owners)
SPECIFIC REQUEST (S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Consider adopting Option "A" as recommended by County Planning
Commission, or Option "B" as described below.
BOARD OPTIONS:
A. Sustain the County Planning Commission's decision to approve
the project with modifications to conditions of approval as
marked in Exhibit "A".
1. Certify the Negative Declaration and accept the
environmental documentation prepared for these projects
as adequate.
2 . Accept the findings of the County Planning Commission as
stated in Resolution No. 37-1997 .
3 . Approve Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Development Plan
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: x YES SIGNATURE
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON necember 16, 1997 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
Phil r1�der, Essex Property Trust, 777 California Avenue, Palo Alto and Jay Lutz, Walden
District Improvement Association, 1370 Las Juntas, Walnut Creek, commented on the project.
All persons desiring to speak having been heard, the hearing was CLOSED. The Board APPROVED
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS staff's recommendatbn Option B as set forth above.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT - - = - - TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact:Aruna Bhat 335-1219
Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTED December 16, 1997
cc: Essex Property Trust PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
Ottmann Properties, Ltd. THV BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Public Works LINTY MINISTRATOR
Redevelopment Agency
B) DEPUTY
2 .
applications as recommended by the County Planning
Commission as shown on the attached Conditions of
Approval marked "Exhibit A" .
4 . Introduce the ordinance giving effect to the aforesaid
rezoning, waive reading and set forth date for adoption
of same .
B. Approve the project as per the County Planning Commission' s
modifications to conditions of approval except for the
deletion of the requirement to comply with M-29 parking
standards identified in condition of approval #1B of Exhibit
"Aff .
1 . Certify the Negative Declaration and accept the
environmental documentation prepared for these projects
as adequate .
2 . Accept the findings of the County Planning Commission as
stated in Resolution No . 37-1997 .
3 . Approve Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Development Plan
applications as recommended by the County Planning
Commission as shown on the attached Conditions of
Approval marked "Exhibit A", except for the deletion of
the changes made to condition of approval 41 (B) .
4 . Introduce the ordinance giving effect to the aforesaid
rezoning, waive reading and set forth date for adoption
of same .
FISCAL IMPACT
None
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
On June 12 , 1997, an application for a rezoning, preliminary
and final development plan application for a 106 unit
apartment project was filed by Essex Property Trust, Inc. &
Ottmann Properties, Ltd. A reversion to acreage was also
filed to combine the seven parcels into one.
In 1986, the County approved a 120 unit condominium
development on the property with 148 parking spaces. However,
these approvals have expired.
The subject property is vacant and is bounded by Cherry Lane,
Las Juntas Way and Santos Lane in close proximity to the BART
station. Eighty-five of the proposed units are one bedroom
and twenty-one of the units are two bedroom. The applicant
proposed a total of one hundred and forty nine parking
spaces.
The general plan for the property is Multiple Family
Residential-Very High Density (30-44 . 9 units/net acre) . The
proposed 106 unit project is consistent with the general plan
for the property.
On November 18 , 1997 , the County Planning Commission, after
taking testimony, recommended that the Board of Supervisors
approve the Rezoning,Development Plan with revisions to the
conditions of approval. The Planning Commission recommended
3 .
that the project adhere to the M-29 parking requirement. The
M-29 parking standards require 170 parking spaces for
residents and 27 spaces for guests amounting to a total of
197 spaces or 48 additional parking spaces to the applicants
proposal.
The Planning Commission approved the reversion to acreage on
this project.
Reasons to approve Option A:
The County Planning Commission recommended that the project
adhere to M-29 standards since they did not want any
potential spillover tenant parking in the adjacent
residential neighborhoods. They determined that reduced
parking was not justified for the project since the property
is located outside the boundaries of the Pleasant Hill BART
Station Specific Plan Area.
Reasons to approve Option B:
Staff's recommendation to the Planning Commission was to
approve the project as proposed with 149 spaces. Staff
determined that the parking was adequate due to its proximity
to the BART station. In the past, the County has approved
apartment projects outside the Specific Plan area with
parking ratios consistent with the Pleasant Hill BART
Specific Plan requirements. The Bay Landing project was
approved with 1. 3 parking spaces/unit, Treat Commons I was
approved with 1. 03 spaces/unit, Treat Commons II was approved
with 1. 15 spaces/unit. Spillover parking has not been
reported or evident from the Bay Landing Apartments, with its
1 . 3 parking spaces/unit. The subject application has 1. 4
spaces/unit as proposed. If a parking requirement of one
space/one bedroom unit and two spaces/two bedroom unit is
applied, then a total of 127 spaces would be required. The
remaining 22 spaces could be used for guest parking.
Multiple family residential is transit supportive. The
traditional distance for significant pedestrian activity is
one-third of a mile. The subject property is less than one-
third of a mile from the BART platform. Pedestrians could
access the station in less than five minutes from this
proposed development. Reduced parking discourages automobile
usage and increases use of mass transit. All the apartment
projects identified above, including the subject property are
located within one and one-half block from the BART platform.
A memo prepared by Jim Kennedy of the County Redevelopment
Agency supporting the reduced parking is attached as Exhibit
"B". A letter submitted by the applicant to the Board is
attached as Exhibit "C".
REVISED CHI, 7 � �•
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
APPROVED PERMIT
APPLICANT: Essex Property Trust, Inc. APPLICATION NO. DP973013
777 California Ave. SD978058
Palo Alto, CA 94304 RZ973051
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 148-350-002
OWNER: Ottman Properties, Ltd. ZONING DISTRICT: P-1
233 Sansome Street
San Francisco,CA 94104 APPROVED DATE: 12/16/97
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/16/97
This is to notify you that the Board of Supervisors has granted your request for a final development plan,
subdivision and rezoning, subject to the attached conditions.
DENNIS M. BARRY AICP
Interim Commu ty,, ,velopment Director
n '
B
PLEASE NOTE THE EFFECTIVE DATE, and be aware of the renewing requirements as no further
notification will be sent by this office. The Clerk of the Board will provide you a copy of the Board
Order with approved Conditions of Approval. This permit will expire ONE YEAR from the effective
date of this permit.
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR RZ973051 DP973013 &SD978058 AS
RECOMMENDED BY THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ON NOVEMBER 18. 1997
Findings
A. Growth Management Element Performance Standards Findings
1. Traffic- The project as proposed will generate approximately additional 58 pm peak
hour trip. Therefore, the applicant is not required to prepared a traffic report pursuant
to the 1988 Measure C requirements. Additionally, the project will be required to
contribute fees to the County for the local transportation improvements in accord
with ordinance requirements prior to issuance of a building permit.
2. Water- Contra Costa Water District has indicated that they have capacity to serve the
project.
3. Sanitary Sewer - The project is within the boundaries of Contra Costa Central
Sanitary District, service is planned for the area.
4. Fire Protection - The subject property is within the Contra Costa Fire Protection
District boundaries and the project will be required to comply with all of the
District's requirements including payment of fees.
5. Public Protection- The Growth Management Element,standard is 155 square feet of
Sheriff facility station area per 1,000 population. The project will generate a
population of 130 approximately, which is far below the standard of the Growth
Management Element standard. Additionally, the Sheriff's office had not comment
on this application.
6. Parks and Recreation -The project will be subject to payment of the park dedication
fee equal to $2,000/unit.
7. Flood Control and Drainage -The project will be required to meet all collect and
convey requirements.
(Ref. the Growth Management Element, Chapter 4, of the General Plan)
B. Rezoning_findings.
1. The change proposed will substantially comply with the general plan.
2. The uses authorized or proposed in the land use district are compatible within the
district and to uses authorized in adjacent districts.
2
3. Community need has been demonstrated for the use proposed, but this does not
require demonstration of future financial success.
(Ref. §26-2.1806 of the County Code)
C. Variance Findinas.
1. That any variance authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and the respective
land use district in which the subject property is located.
2. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property because of
its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the
respective zoning regulations is found to deprive the subject property of rights
enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and within the identical land use district.
3. That any variance authorized shall substantially meet the intent and purpose of the
respective land use district in which the subject property is located.
(Ref. §26-2.2006 of the County Code)
D. Planned Unit (P-1)District Findings:
1. Adoption of P-1 Zoning and Approval of a Preliminary or Final Development Plan
a. The applicant intends to start construction within two and one-half years
from the effective date of the zoning change and plan approval;
b. The proposed planned unit development is consistent with the county general
plan;
C. In the case of residential development, it will constitute a residential
environment of sustained desirability and stability, and will be in harmony
with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and community;
d. The development of a harmonious integrated plan justifies exceptions from
the normal application of this code.
(Ref. §84-66.1406 of the County Code)
3
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. This approval is based upon the following documents received by the Community
Development Department:
A. Subdivision 8058, Reversion to Acreage Map, received on October 10,1997, by the
Community Development Department for reversion of seven lots into one lot on the
2.83 acre site.
B. Preliminary and Final Development Plan received October 10, 1997, by the
Community Development Department.
C. Landscape Plan and signage drawings prepared by Isaacson, Wood Associates, dated
received October 10, 1997.
D. Geotechnical Reports prepared by Buller Group, dated July 12, 1997 and August 28,
1997.
E. Tree evaluation, protection and preservation recommendations' (Arborist Report)
prepared by Ray Morneau, dated received October 9, 1997.
F. Traffic Study prepared by Abrams Associates, dated September 1997.
G. Archaeological Report prepared by Miley Holman, dated September 3, 1997.
2. The rezoning to P-1 and Preliminary Development Plan request is approved to allow for the
development of 106 multiple family dwelling units. The approval is based on a General Plan
designation of Multiple Family Very High Density which allows the development of 106
multiple family units. Home occupations consistent with the provisions of Section 82-4.240
of the County zoning ordinance shall be permitted.
3. A variance is approved to allow a P-1 zoning on a parcel:
A. 5 acres for residential use required.
B. 2.83 acres approved.
4. The proposed buildings shall be similar to that shown on submitted plans. Prior to the
issuance of a building permit, elevations and architectural design of the building and
building roofing material shall be submitted for final review and approval by the County
Zoning Administrator. The roofs and exterior walls of the buildings shall be free of such
objects as air conditioning or utility equipment, television aerials, etc., or screened from
view. The building shall be finished in stucco or other materials acceptable to the Zoning
Administrator.
4
5. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Zoning Administrator shall review and approve the
location of the bicycle parking areas.
6. The Zoning Administrator shall review and approve the location of the play area prior to
issuance of building permit.
7. All the proposed signs shall be subject to the review and approval of the Zoning
Administrator prior to issuance of the building permit. The wall on which the sign is
proposed to be located shall be reduced in length.
8. Should archaeological materials be uncovered during grading, trenching or other on-site
excavation(s), earthwork within 30 yards of these materials shall be stopped until a profes-
sional archaeologist who is certified by the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has
had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitiga-
tion(s), if deemed necessary.
9. At least 30 days prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) information program in accord with the
requirements of Ordinance No. 92-31 for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator.
Applicant shall also comply with the County Growth Management Program and Bay Area
Air Quality Management District regulations regarding transportation.
10. The apartment units shall be designed to comply with the Sound. Transmission Control
Standards of the Uniform Building Code for the State of California 1989 Amendments. It
shall be designed such that the interior noise levels do not exceed a CNEL of 45 dB.
11. Comply with the following construction, noise, dust and litter control requirements:
A. All construction activities, including such things as power generators, shall be
limited to the hours of 7:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and shall be
prohibited on State and Federal.holidays.
B. The project sponsor shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all
internal combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall
locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors and concrete
pumpers as far away from existing residences as possible.
C. At least one week prior to commencement of grading, the applicant shall post the site
and mail to the owners of property within 300 feet of the exterior boundary of the
project site notice that construction work will commence. The notice shall include
a list of contact persons with name, title, phone number and area of responsibility.
The person responsible for maintaining the list shall be included. The list shall be
kept current at all tirnes and shall consist of persons with authority to indicate and
implement corrective action in their area of responsibility. The names of the
individual responsible for noise and litter control shall be expressly identified in the
notice.
A copy of the notice shall be concurrently transmitted to the community
Development Department. The notice shall be accompanied by a list of the names
and addresses of the property owners noticed, and a map identifying the area noticed.
D. A dust and litter control program shall be submitted for the review and approval of
the Zoning Administrator. Any violation of the approved program or applicable
ordinances shall require an immediate work stoppage. Construction work shall not
be allowed to resume until, if necessary, an appropriate construction bond has been
posted.
E. The applicant shall make a good-faith effort to avoid interference with existing
neighborhood traffic flows. This shall include provision for an on-site area in which
to park earth moving equipment.
F. Transporting of heavy equipment and trucks shall be limited to week days between
the hours of 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM.
G. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of
construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site.
H. The project shall comply with the dust control requirements of the Grading
Ordinance including provisions pertaining to water conservation.
J. Construction-related vehicle access to the site shall be limited to Santos Lane and
Las Juntas Way.
12. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the subdivider or
any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Contra Cosa County
Planning Agency and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the Agency (the County) or its agents, officers, or employees to attack,
set aside, void, or annul, the Agency's approval concerning this subdivision map application,
which action is brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37. The
County will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding and
cooperate fully in the defense.
13. At least 30 days prior to issuance of a grading permit, or installation of improvements or
utilities, applicant shall submit a preliminary geology, soil, and foundation report meeting
the requirements of Subdivision Ordinance Section 94-4.420 for review and approval of the
Zoning Administrator. Improvement, grading, and building plans shall carry out the
recommendations of the approved report. This report shall include evaluation of the
6
potential for liquefaction, seismic settlement and other types of seismically-induced ground
failure by recognized methods appropriate to soil conditions discovered during subsurface
investigation.
14. To assure protection and/or reasonable replacement of existing trees to be preserved which
are in proximity to project improvements, the applicant shall post a bond (or cash deposit or
other surety)for the required work with the Community Development Department. The term
of the bond shall extend at least 24 months beyond the completion of construction. Prior to
posting the bond or deposit, a licensed arborist shall assess the value of the trees and
reasonable compensatory terms in the event that a tree to be preserved is destroyed or
otherwise damaged by construction-related activity. The tree bonding program shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator.
15. If occupancy is requested prior to the installation of the landscape and irrigation
improvements, then either: (1) a cash deposit; (2) a bond; or (3) a letter of credit, shall be
delivered to the County for 125 percent of the estimated cost of the uncompleted portion of
the landscape and irrigation improvements. If compliance is not achieved after six months
of occupancy as determined by the County Zoning Administrator, the County shall contract
for the completion of the landscaping and irrigation improvements to be paid for by the held
sum. The County shall return the unused portion within one year of receipt or at the
completion of all work.
16. A final landscaping and irrigation plan for all areas shown on the plan shall be submitted for
review and approval of the Zoning Administrator at least 30 days prior to issuance of
building permits . A cost estimate shall be submitted with the landscaping program plan.
Landscaping shall conform to the County Water Conservation Landscape Ordinance 82-26
and shall be installed prior to approval of final building permit. The plan shall be prepared
by a licensed landscape architect and shall be certified to be in compliance with the County
Water Conservation Ordinance.
17. California native drought tolerant plant or shall be used as much as possible. All trees shall
be a minimum 15-gallon size, all shrubs shall be a minimum 5-gallon size, except as
otherwise noted.
18. Prior to occupancy, an on-site inspection shall be made of privately owned lands by a
licensed landscape professional to determine compliance with the approved landscape plan.
A certification of completion shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and
approval.
19. The applicant shall increase all proposed driveway aisle widths to a minimum of 25 feet. The
driveway widths shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to
issuance of building permits.
20. Exterior lights shall be deflected so that lights shine onto application's property and not
toward adjacent properties.
21. The refuse area shall be properly screened and gated. The Zoning Administrator shall
review and approve the location and screening of the refuse area prior to issuance of the
building permit.
22. The applicant shall comply with the Contra Costa County Ordinance pertaining to water
conservation. Compliance with the Water Conservation Ordinance shall be designed to
encourage low-flow water devices and other interior and exterior water conservation
techniques.
Public Works Conditions
Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9 and Title 10 of the Ordinance. Any
Ordinance Code exceptions must be stipulated in these Conditions of approval. Conditions of
Approval are based on the Vesting Tentative Map submitted on September 15, 1997.
Comply with the Following Conditions of Approval Prior to Filing of the Final Map:
General Requirements
23. Applicant shall submit improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer to Public
Works and pay appropriate fees in accordance with the County Ordinance and these
conditions of approval.
Roadway Improvements Along Las Juntas Way:
24. The applicant shall widen Las Juntas Way to a 13.2± meter (44-foot) width to curb face,
construct curb and gutter, longitudinal and transverse drainage, street lighting and 2.0 meter±
(6.5-foot) sidewalk (width measured from curb face) along the Las Juntas Way frontage of
this property.
Roadway Improvements along Cherry Lane:
25. Applicant shall repair damaged curb and gutter, necessary longitudinal and transverse
drainage along the portion of the Cherry Lane frontage which has been improved with curb
and gutter.
26. Applicant shall install necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage and along the portion
of Cherry Lane which has not been improved with curb and gutter. Roadway drainage shall
be conveyed in a shallow swale along this portion of Cherry Lane.
f.
8
Roadway Improvements Along Santos Lane:
27. Applicant shall install a 1.5 meter± (5-foot) sidewalk along the northeast side of Santos Lane
and connect it to the sidewalk to the southeast.
Access to Adjoining Property:
28. Applicant shall furnish necessary rights of way, rights of entry, permits and/or easements for
the construction of off-site, temporary or permanent, public and private road and drainage
improvements.
29. Applicant shall furnish proof to Public Works that legal access to the property is available
to Cherry Lane and to Las Juntas Way via Santos Lane from this property.
Encroachment Permit:
30. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Application & Permit Center, if
necessary, for construction of driveways or other improvements within the right of way of
Las Juntas Way or Cherry Lane, unless the work is covered by improvement plans reviewed
and stamped by Public works.
Site Access
31. Access is only allowed at the locations shown on the approved site/development plan. Both
Santos Lane access points shall have a 8.4 meter± (28-foot) wide entrance throat, subject to
the review of Public Works and the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The
Cherry Lane emergency vehicle access (EVA) shall be paved to a 6.0 meter± (20-foot) width
within a 7.5 meter± (25-foot) wide emergency access easement. The EVA shall be paved
with open pavers or asphalt concrete and shall be developed with driveway depressions at
Cherry Lane.and the adjacent driveway area. The EVA shall be limited to emergency traffic
with lock break away bollards or a locked break away gate, subject to review of Public
Works and review and approval of the Zoning Administrator.
Road-Alignment/Sight Distance:
32. Provide sight distance at the project's Santos Lane access points for a design speed of 56
kilometers per hour± (35 miles per hour) in accordance with Caltrans standards.
Road Dedication:
33. Applicant shall convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, the additional Cherry Lane
right of way to place the right of way line 3.0 meter± (10-feet) from the curb face and extend
that right of way width to the southeasterly property line of this property.
9
34. Applicant shall convey to the County,.by Offer of Dedication, the additional Las Juntas Way
right of way necessary to provide 3.0 meter± (10-feet) from the proposed curb face to the
new right of way line.
35. The applciant shall also provide a 22-foot half width road easement and a 2.1 meter (7-foot)
wide public utility, maintenance and sidewalk easement along the Santos Lane frontage of
this property.
Street Lights:
36. Property owner shall apply for annexation to County Service Area L-100 Lighting District.
Annexation shall occur prior to issuance of building permits, initiation of use and filing of
the final map.
Bicycle-Pedestrian Facilities:
37. Pedestrian Access: All public and private pedestrian facilities and access ways shall be
designed in accordance with Title 24 (Handicap access) and the Americans with Disabilities
Act. This shall include all sidewalks, paths, trails, driveway depressions, as well as handicap
ramps.
Parking:
38. "No Parking" signs shall be installed along a portion of Santos Lane to provide a usable
alignment along Santos Lane for a 56 kilometers per hour± (35 per hour) design speed.
Utilities/Underground:
39. All utility distribution facilities shall be installed underground, including the existing
overhead distribution facilities along the frontage.
Maintenance of Facilities:
40. Applicant shall develop, and the property owner shall enter into, a road maintenance
agreement that will insure that Santos lane will be maintained, and that the owner(s) of this
property will share in its maintenance, based on their fair share of generated trips. The road
maintenance agreement shall be recorded. The road maintenance agreement shall state the
property owner(s) obligation.
Parking:
41. Elimination of parking spaces P-1 and P-2 and placement of"No Parking" signs may be
required to prevent parking in that area, subject to the review of Public Works and the review
and approval of the County Zoning Administrator as required to minimize safety hazards.
10
Drainage:
42. Division 914 of the Ordinance Code requires that all storm waters entering or originating
within the subject property shall be conveyed, without diversion and within an adequate
storm drainage facility, to a natural watercourse having definable bed and banks, or to an
existing adequate public storm drainage facility which conveys the storm waters to a natural
watercourse.
The applciant shall discharge stormwater from this proeprty to the Walnut Creek channel at
an existing outfall adequate to convey that water, subject to the review of the CCCFC &
WCD. If this is shown to be infeasible, Public Works may permit an alternate outfall,
subject to CCCFC &WCD review. Any potential drainage diversions will only be permitted
with CCCFC & WCD approval.
43. Storm drainage facilities required by Divison 914 shall be designed and constructed in
accordance with specifications outlined in Division 914 and in compliance with design
standards of the Public Works Department.
44. Discharging concentrated storm water into roadside ditches is prohibited by the Ordinance
Code. However, as roadside ditches are characteristic of the`are, an exception from this
requirement is granted for the area along Cherry Lane provided the applicant verifies the
adequacy of the downstream ditch system or constructs any necessary improvements to make
this system adequate. This exception is permitted to allow a shallow drainage swale along
Cherry Lane.
45. Storm drainage originating on the property and conveyed in a concentrated manner shall be
prevented from draining across the sidewalks and driveways.
46. The applicant shall install within a dedicated drainage easement any portion of the drainage
system which conveys run-off from public streets.
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System:
47. The applicant shall be requried to comply with all rules, regulations, and procedures of the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) for municipal, construction and
industrial activities as promulgated by the California State Water Resources Control Board,
or any of its Regional Water Quality Control Boards (San Francisco Bay - Region II or
Central Valley - Region V).
Compliance shall also include developing long-term practices (BMP's) for the reduction or
elimination of storm water pollutants. The project design shall also incorporate some or all
of the following long-term BMP's in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water
Program for the site's storm water drainage:
11
* Shallow swales along a portion of Cherry Lane.
* Stenciling all storm drains with "No Dumping - Drains to Delta" using thermoplastic
tape.
* Annual sweeping of parking areas between September 1 and October 15.
Metric:
48. The County Public Works Department is requiring that all first check submittals and
accompanying calculations including subdivision grading plans, improvement plans,
hydrology and hydraulic maps, final maps, parcel maps, right-of-way maps and descriptions
shall be in metric units. Exceptions may be permitted, based on substantial reason, subject
to the review and approval of the Public Works Department - Engineering Services Division.
Payment of Staff Costs.
49. Both the applicant and the property owner are fully responsible for County staff costs which
exceed 120% of the initial application fee. Invoice(s) for the additional costs will be mailed
to the applicant and are due and payable 30-days following the date of the invoice. The
unpaid balance shall be collected prior to issuance of building permits. The applicant can
obtain the current status of staff costs on this application from.the project planner.
50. The applicant shall provide adequate sight distance at the Las Juntas Way intersections with
Santos Lane and Cherry Lane in conformance with Ordinance Code Chapter 82-18, "Sight
Obstructions at Intersections."
ADVISORY NOTES
PLEASE NOTE ADVISORY NOTES ARE ATTACHED TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
BUT ARE NOT A PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. ADVISORY NOTES ARE
PROVIDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INFORMING THE APPLICANT OF ADDITIONAL
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS THAT MUST BE MET IN ORDER TO PROCEED WITH
DEVELOPMENT.
A. Comply with the requirements of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District.
B. Comply with the requirements of the Contra Costa Water District.
C. Comply with the requirements of the County Building Inspection Department.
D. Comply with the requirements of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.
12
E. The applicant shall pay park dedication fee and child care fee prior to the issuance of
building permits. The park dedication fee at this time is $2000 and the child care fee is
$100/each two bedroom unit.
F. The applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare
Fee Ordinance for the Central County Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of
Supervisors.
G. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish & Game. It is the
applicant's responsibility to notify the Department of Fish & Game, P.O. Box 47,
Yountville, California 94599, of any proposed construction within this development that may
affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish & Game Code.
H. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers. It is the
applicant's responsibility to notify the appropriate district of the Corps of Engineers to
determine if a permit is required, and if it can be obtained.
AMB/aa
DPV/3013-97c.AMB
11/4/97
11/18/97 - CPC (a)
12/2/97
3/3/98
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: November 24, 1997
TO: Dennis M. Bpxy,—lntfrim Director
FROM: Pbu7nty
y, uty Director-Redevelopment
SUBJECT: RZ973051,DP973013,and SD978058 (Essex Property Trust)
This is being provided as information to be included in materials being considered for the Board of Supervisors
relative to the above referenced applications. This information supports the request that Condition of Approval
1(B) be modified to delete the Planning Commission recommendation which raised the on-site parking
requirements.
I. HISTORICAL PRECEDENCE
The Pleasant Hill BART Station Area is a model of transit-oriented development,i.e.,development that
is of high density,mixed use,and pedestrian oriented with easy access to a transit station. The Pleasant
Hill BART Station Area Specific Plan sets forth the development standards to achieve transit oriented
development, including reduced parking requirements for residential (and commercial) projects.
Reducing on-site parking is both an inducement for utilizing transit, and a reflection of the fact that
people need fewer cars. It has been a long-standing practice of the County to utilize the parking
standards of the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific Plan in the multi-family area just to the east
of the Station Area,between the former Southern Pacific right-of-way and Cherry Lane. For example,
Treat Commons I and R were developed with a parking ratio of 1.03 and 1.15 per unit respectively;Bay
Landing was developed at 1.3;Park Regency(which is in the Specific Plan area)at 1.37. The subject
developer was proposing a parking ratio of 1.4.
II. RESIDENTIAL TRIP GENERATION
The recently completed Final Traffic Report, which was subject to multi jurisdictional oversight,
provides empirical data that supports commute ridership of 40% for residences within 1/3 mile of a
BART Station(Appendix A). This 40%commute ridership was used to reduce ITE trip generation rates
in the Traffic Report.
III. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES
Among the principles that have emerged with respect to transit-oriented development is the concept of
reduced parking. The Center for Livable Communities, for example, included reducing the supply of
parking as an element of good transit-oriented development in its 1996 publication"A Policymaker's
Guide to Transit Oriented Development"(Appendix B). A recent(December 1996)American Planning
Association publication entitled"Creating Transit-Supportive Land Use Regulations"also encourages
the reduction of parking. It observes that"abundant,free parking makes it convenient for automobile
owners to use their car rather than choose transit or other alternatives... Measures that reduce the supply
of free parking can be among the most effective tools for motivating a switch from single occupancy
vehicle travel."
JK:Ih-sraV/essex.niem
�XNI131Y " 13►►
Essex Property Trust, Inc.
777 California Avenue
Palo Alto,CA 94304
Tel: 650 494 3700
Fax:650 858 0139
Fax:650 494 8743
www.essexproperties.com
December 1, 1997
Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County
Contra Costa County Administration Building
451 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553-0095
Dear Honorable Board Members:
For a year and a half, Essex Property Trust,Inc. has worked closely and in good faith
with your professional staff and other County departments, as well as the Walden
Improvement Association and neighbors of our proposed Station Park Apartments
project. The plans have been revised several times to accommodate issues raised by
staff, Walden Improvement Association, and neighbors. The project consists of 85
one-bedroom units and 21 two-bedroom units with 149 parking spaces. The parking
ratio for the project is 1.4 spaces per unit. County staff, Walden Improvement
Association, and the neighbors all support the project and recommended approval of
the project to the Planning Commission. We firmly believe the project incorporates
excellent architecture, site planning, open spaces, and landscaping, is compatible
with and enhances the neighborhood, and is an excellent addition to the area
surrounding the Pleasant Hill BART Station.
The County's staff report recommended that the Planning Commission approve the
project. On November 18, 1997, the Planning Commission recommended approval
of the project to the Board of Supervisors and added four conditions: 1) more open
space, 2) a tot lot, 3) increased provisions for bicycles, and 4) 47 additional parking
spaces. We agree with the first three conditions and have already modified our site
plan accordingly. We strongly disagree with the fourth condition. Further, we have
already agreed to the 51 conditions recommended by County staff including
undergrounding the existing overhead lines along Las Juntas Way and Cherry Lane,
even though other projects in the area have not been required to do so. Also, we will
be the only project in the area with a tot lot. The balance of this letter addresses the
one remaining concern, the recommendation from the Planning Commission that we
provide 47 additional parking spaces.
From the beginning, when we met with County staff, a year and a half ago, we were
told that even though we were not within the limits of the Pleasant Hill BART Station
Area Specific Plan, we would be held to the provisions of the plan. We were told
that we would be required to pay a $300,000 specific plan fee and would be subject
Essex Property Trust, Inc.
to the parking provisions of the plan. Those provisions are that we could provide no
less than 1 parking space and no more than 1.5 parking spaces for each housing unit.
The parking ratio was to be at the higher end if the project were to have all two-
bedroom units and at the lower end if the project were to consist predominantly of
studios and one-bedroom units. All of our planning and design work for the entire
year and a half has been based on those specific directions. Further, your staff, as the
project proceeded, determined that we should provide no more than 1.4 parking
spaces per unit. We agree with staff that this standard is appropriate for our project
for several reasons:
1. For the last eleven years, the County has been applying the BART Station Area
Specific Plan standards for parking in adjoining areas even though outside the
specific plan boundary (across the street: Treat Commons I & II and Bay
Landing apartment projects).
2. The standard of 1.4 spaces per unit is more than adequate for this location based
on our review of information from other sources. For instance, the Institute of
Transportation Engineers, a recognized national organization, in the publication
Parking Generation, 2"d Edition, 1987, with respect to "Low/Mid-Rise
Apartments" states: "The data indicate that the parking rate is always less than 2
spaces per housing unit, with the average rate being less than 1.2 spaces per
housing unit." The finding is based on studies of 60 apartment projects that were
conducted between the hours of 10 PM and 12 Midnight and 5 AM and 6 AM for
projects with an average of 222 housing units. The majority of the studies were
conducted in California,Illinois and Texas.
3. Our project is no further from the BART Station than are several multiple family
projects within the specific plan. The ease of access, one and a half blocks, is
similar for our project as for projects within the specific plan.
4. We have surveyed the parking ratios for all of the apartment projects built in the
area both within and outside the specific plan over the last eleven years. Our
project clearly provides the highest parking ratio. The results are summarized in
the table below.
Project Within or Outside Parking Ratio
Specific Plan
Treat Commons I Outside 1.03
Treat Commons II Outside 1.15
Bay Landing Outside 1.3
Park Regency Within 137
Our Project Outside 1.4
2
Essex Property Trust, Inc.
5. In the 1980's, on our site, two apartment projects proposed by other developers
were approved with more units and less parking than our project. The first
project was approved for 120 units and 148 parking spaces, a parking ratio of
1.23. The second project was approved for 108 units and 135 parking spaces, a
parking ratio of 1.25. Our project clearly has fewer units and provides more
parking. In addition, we believe our project has better architecture and site
planning, provides greater setbacks from the streets and neighbors, and is not as
bulky and tall as the two previously approved projects.
6. Studies by our traffic engineer, Charles Abrams, P.E., of Abrams Associates,
show that we are providing more than the necessary amount of parking spaces for
the project.
Were the recommendation of the Planning Commission accepted at a ratio of 1.85
parking spaces per unit, we would be forced to completely redesign and re-engineer
our project. A full year and a half and the attendant costs would have been wasted.
Further, our analysis indicates that it would not be possible to develop the project at
the 1.85 parking ratio and provide anywhere near the same level of open space,
landscaping, and the low profile along Cherry Lane. As you know, we have kept the
buildings along Cherry Lane low and with far greater than required setbacks in
specific response to the concerns of the neighbors, resulting in reducing the number
of units by 14. In addition, if we are not subject to the parking standards of the
specific plan, we will not be subject to the $300,000 specific plan fee.
Beyond these facts, we feel we would be treated unfairly given the directions we
have been given and the history of approvals of projects in the area. All we ask is to
be treated fairly as others have been treated with respect to parking. If the County
believes the policy of applying provisions of the BART Station Area Specific Plan to
nearby areas should be changed, then it would appear fair to make that change and so
inform staff. Such a change should then apply to new applications, and not apply
retroactively to projects that have received full staff review and are ready for
approval, such as our project.
As your Board knows, our property is currently zoned P-1 (Planned Unit District)
and our application is for P-1 (Planned Unit District— 106 units) zoning. Under that
zoning, parking ratios are to be established for each project. It is not necessary or
appropriate to utilize parking ratios for other zoning districts. In this case, your
professional staff has consistently recommended a parking ratio of no more than 1.4
spaces per unit.
3
Essex Property Trust, Inc.
We sincerely hope that you will approve the project with all of the conditions
recommended by the Planning Commission, but delete the condition increasing our
parking ratio to 1.85 and allow the project to proceed at the proposed parking ratio of
1.4.
We appreciate the opportunity to meet with your Board. We look forward to the
prospect of developing a project that fits into the neighborhood, is supported by staff,
the Walden Improvement Association and neighbors, and is a credit to the County
and is well-related to the BART Station Area Specific Plan.
Sincerely,
Z7hil?Mar, Project Manager
s
Judy, Senior Vice President
4
CONDER ti�
H
December 5, 1997
Supervisor Donna Gerber-District III =CLERK
EBOA:RD
309 Diablo RoadDanville, California 94521 SUPERVISORS
Dear Supervisor Gerber:
I am writing you regarding Essex Property Trust Inc. project.
My family has owned/lived on Cherry Lane since 1938. Our neighbors(most of them also have
lived on Cherry Lane 15-25 yrs.) are very sensitive to the wonderful rural oak country setting we
enjoy and has been preserved these many years.
Over the years, the empty property consisting of 2.83 acres has become an eyesore. Large
sections of old carpet, automobile motors, refrigerators, and debris has accumulated. The Land
Management office representing the previous owner was contacted, and finally a rental chain link
fence was installed around the perimeter and debris was removed.
We now have an opportunity for development by Essex Property Trust who has planned and
incorporated in their project many of the concerns presented to them by the residential
neighborhood.
Their architecture, step down building elevations, site planning, set backs, open space, and
landscaping is the best plan ever over the two previously approved projects.
I sincerely hope the Board of Supervisors approve this project with conditions recommended by
the Planning Commission but delete the condition increasing parking ratio from 1.85 and allow
the project to proceed at the proposed parking ratio of 1.4, that Essex Property Trust firmly
needs.
Sincerely,
Wallace V. Santos
2965 Cherry Lane
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
510/934-2503
cc: Mark De Saulnier District IV
2425 Bisso Lane, Suite 110
Concord, CA 94520
/Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
651 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Essex Property Trust
Walden Association